Alan b

Are you a cone-head with overlarge eye sockets? You fit the mould!

Both sides of this discussion are guilty of the same: identification with gender/sex.

When children are taught that their happiness depends on their body parts and their corresponding social functions, undoubtedly some of them will ask: "then why am I unhappy?".

Gender and sexuality are not such a big deal, unless one is falsely taught this way, usually due to their parents own unfinished ambitions in this area - Just stop fussing about it!

Since Runner is so concerned with science, it would do him well to note that there are many documented cases of ambiguous genitalia and not a few cases of hermaphrodites with full dual sets of gonads and others with less complete sets. All within the normal range of human variation.
Given this known variation in primary sexual characteristics, and how some of these variations can *also* be induced by environmental oestrogens or exposure to a sibling in the womb, it becomes clear that things are not as black and white as runner would in his ignorance pretend. Brain structures are also influenced by many hormones *and* subject to biological variation, and we can all be absolutely certain that runner's capacities do not extend so far as to say which of these are immutable and which not.

Since runner's views and religion lack the capacity or honesty to
acknowledge extant facts of the real world he should be silent
and not presume that his personal limitations or his dullard religion could possibly be useful to people who do. His insistence on sharing simply underlines the unfitness of his religion to prepare people participate in public policy.